Social – Disclaimer: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, any copyrighted work in the Aladins Miracle Lamp is archived here under fair use without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in reviewing the included information for personal use, non-profit research and educational purposes only. Ref. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. The opinions rendered are exclusively those of the authors/sources and not those of this website or Aladin whose sole function is to collect and not to write or comment articles. The function "Author" does not exist

4. November 20154. November 2015

Vladimir Putin: The New World Order Worships Satan

Kevin Barrett: “It is worth noting that Russia and Iran – the two nations most successfully resisting NWO regime change – are doing so in the name of God…. Putin’s reference to Satanism was a pointed rebuke to the New World Order elites, who – though they push militant secularism on the societies they are trying to undermine – are closet Satanists.”

During the Cold War, the United States and much of the West argued that the Soviet Union was a “godless nation.”[1] Last year, Vladimir Putin took that pendulum, swung it on the other direction, and landed it on the Zionist regime. As Patrick Buchanan put it then, “In the new war of beliefs, Putin is saying, it is Russia that is on God’s side. The West is Gomorrah.”[2] Putin said:

“Many Euro-Atlantic countries have moved away from their roots, including Christian values. Policies are being pursued that place on the same level a multi-child family and a same-sex partnership, a faith in God and a belief in Satan. This is the path to degradation.”[3]

If you think that Putin is just pulling your leg here, then get this:

The Washington Times reported then:

“In his state of the nation address, Mr. Putin also portrayed Russia as a staunch defender of ‘traditional values’ against what he depicted as the morally bankrupt West. Social and religious conservatism, the former KGB officer insisted, is the only way to prevent the world from slipping into ‘chaotic darkness.’

“As part of this defense of ‘Christian values,’ Russia has adopted a law banning “homosexual propaganda” and another that makes it a criminal offense to ‘insult’ the religious sensibilities of believers…

“Although Mr. Putin has never made a secret of what he says is his deep Christian faith, his first decade in power was largely free of overtly religious rhetoric. Little or no attempt was made to impose a set of values on Russians or lecture to the West on morals.”[4]

Certainly Putin put the moral equation back on the table. Kevin Barrett declared that Putin here was trying to “put the fear of God in the New World Order.” Barrett moved on to make the forceful argument that much of the Zionist establishment in the West is afraid of Putin because the establishment leaves in fear. “Russian President Putin is resisting,” said Barrett. “That is why the Western propaganda machine is calling him names.” Barrett continued to argue cogently:

“It is worth noting that Russia and Iran – the two nations most successfully resisting NWO regime change – are doing so in the name of God…. Putin’s reference to Satanism was a pointed rebuke to the New World Order elites, who – though they push militant secularism on the societies they are trying to undermine – are closet Satanists.

“Anyone who doubts this should run the name ‘Lt. Col. Michael Aquino’ through a search engine. Aquino, an avowed Satanist and credibly-accused mass child abuser, was rewarded for his crimes against children with an appointment as Chief of Psychological Warfare for the US military…

“The shock troops of the NWO’s war against religion and tradition (and Russia and Iran) are the neoconservatives. Operation Gladio terrorist Michael Ledeen explains:

“‘Creative destruction is our middle name, both within our society and abroad. We tear down the old order every day, from business to science, literature, art, architecture, and cinema to politics and the law. Our enemies have always hated this whirlwind of energy and creativity which menaces their traditions (whatever they may be) and shames them for their inability to keep pace … We must destroy them to advance our historic mission.’

“Putin is stopping New World Order ‘creative destruction’ in Syria and Ukraine. He is part of a growing coalition opposing the NWO – not just religious traditionalists, but also progressive anti-globalization forces, including Hugo Chavez inspired anti-imperialists in Latin America.”

Kudos for Barrett here. The regime proved Putin right by applauding the Pussy Riot,[5] a Trotskyite group that ended up having sex (literal pornography) at the Moscow National Museum. (We have discussed this issue in the past.) As always, Neocons like Seth Mandel of Commentary were on the front line defending their brethren.[6]

But the crucial point here is that Putin, like Emmanuel Kant and even John Adams and others, understands that a nation cannot exist without objective morality, and objective morality cannot exist without Logos,[7] the essence and sustainer of the moral universe.

In that sense, and whether he notices it or not, Putin was implicitly or indirectly attacking the Neo-Darwinian ideology, which states that objective morality is an illusion and has no metaphysical basis. It is here that we find again that Neo-Darwinian metaphysics is intellectually useless and worthless because it denies the very essence of a moral universe.

As we have noted in the past, serious Darwinists agree that objective morality is an illusion. The noted biology philosopher Michael Ruse once again said that “there are no grounds whatsoever for being good…. Morality is flimflam.”[8] Yet like his intellectual antecedent Charles Darwin, Ruse ends up contradicting himself in the very next sentence by saying,

“Does this mean that you can just go out and rape and pillage, behave like an ancient Roman grabbing Sabine women? Not at all. I said that there are no grounds for being good. It doesn’t follow that you should be bad.”[9]

Well, duh! If there are no grounds for objective morality, then good and bad are also illusion. There is not such a thing as rape or bad behavior. What is good for you may not be good for me, and there is no way of adjudicating competing explanations. In that kind of world, might makes right. Ruse does not really have a problem with this argument here. In fact, he moves on to say that morality

“is something forged in the struggle for existence and reproduction, something fashioned by natural selection. It is as much a natural human adaptation as our ears or noses or teeth or penises or vaginas. It works and it has no meaning over and above this. If all future food were Pablum, we would probably be better off without teeth.

“Morality is just a matter of emotions, like liking ice cream and sex and hating toothache and marking student papers. But it is, and has to be, a funny kind of emotion. It has to pretend that it is not that at all! If we thought that morality was no more than liking or not liking spinach, then pretty quickly it would break down.

“Before long, we would find ourselves saying something like: ‘Well, morality is a jolly good thing from a personal point of view. When I am hungry or sick, I can rely on my fellow humans to help me. But really it is all bullshit, so when they need help I can and should avoid putting myself out. There is nothing there for me.’ The trouble is that everyone would start saying this, and so very quickly there would be no morality and society would collapse and each and every one of us would suffer

“So morality has to come across as something that is more than emotion. It has to appear to be objective, even though really it is subjective.”[10]

Ruse, like some genetic theorists, really believes that “morality is an illusion put in place by your genes to make you a social cooperator…”[11]

This, by the way, is logically congruent with Darwin’s survival of the fittest. And survival of the fittest is logically congruent with Zionism. If evolutionary theory “explains how warfare contributed to fitness in the course of the evolution of Homo sapiens,” as scholar Bradley A. Thayer maintains,[12] then how can a serious Darwinist say that social Darwinism or even Zionism is really bad on a consistent and logical basis?

Thayer, of course, struggles mightily to rationally defend the thesis that “Warfare contributes to fitness”[13] and that “people wage war to gain and defend resources”[14] while maintaining that social Darwinists were wrong in taking social Darwinism to its logical conclusion. He says that “social Darwinists perverted Charles Darwin’s argument” and

“distorted evolutionary explanations because they misunderstood Darwin’s ideas and were ignorant of or consciously chose to ignore the naturalistic fallacy. Those who use evolutionary theory to explain aspects of human behavior must recall the social Darwinists’ errors. Doing so makes it possible not only to avoid repeating errors but also to advance scientific understanding.”[15]

But Thayer moves on to make this argument:

“The ultimate causation for warfare is anchored in Darwinian natural selection and inclusive fitness….warfare can increase both the absolute and relative fitness of humans…From the classical Darwinian perspective, warfare contributes to fitness because individuals who wage war successfully are better able to survive and reproduce.”[16]

Thayer repeats this thesis over and over in the course of the book:

“An ultimate causal explanation for warfare based in evolutionary theory begins with the recognition that warfare contributes to fitness in certain circumstances because successful warfare lets the winner acquire resources.

“For evolutionary biology, a resource is any material substance that has the potential to increase the individual’s ability to survive or reproduce. As such it may be food, shelter, or territory, especially high-quality soil or wild foods; abundant firewood; or territory free of dangerous animals, such as lions, or insect infestations, or disease; and also status coalition allies, and members of the opposite sex.”[17]

And then this: “Warfare might be necessary then for offensive purposes, to plunder resources from others. In these circumstances, an individual becomes fitter if he can successfully attack to take the resources of others.”[18]

Thayer cites evolutionary theorist William Durham saying that

“War is one means by which individuals ‘may improve the material conditions of their lives and thereby increae their ability to survive and reproduce…Thus successful warfare would help the tribe gain resources, and for a swidden agricultural economy land is critically important.”[19]

So, is Thayer really against social Darwinism? Ideologically, yes. Consistently and logically? No. I honestly don’t blame him, for his intellectual grandfather could not solve that problem either and had to live in contradiction until his dying day. Darwin declared at the end of his Origin of Species:

“Thus, from the war of nature, from famine and death, the most exalted object which we are capable of conceiving, namely, the production of the higher animals, directly follows.”[20]

Correct me if I am wrong here: isn’t he saying that war and famine and death are things that will get the higher animals ahead?

Scholars of all stripes agree that this is Darwin at his best. Yet when social Darwinists took his thesis and spread it across the political spectrum, Darwin disagreed![21]

If the Dreadful Few are in the struggle for survival, then the Goyim must swiftly be eliminated. That is certainly consistent with Darwin’s grand scheme. If people cannot see this and try to avoid this vital contradiction, then you can be sure that they are not to be taken seriously or they do not understand logic.

So, when people are trying to maintain an objective morality by either appealing to the so-called “evolutionary theory” or even DNA, then you can be sure that those people either are out of touch with the scholarly literature, are not well equipped to understand or articulate their own position, or are just deliberately lying.

Furthermore, to appeal to reciprocal altruism to prove objective morality, a central protocol in Darwin’s grand scheme,[22] is also a dead end because the life of Mother Theresa and countless other examples prove that this idea will not work. I was hoping that modern Darwinists would make some good improvement on this warfare theory, but so far virtually everyone has failed.

I am certainly not asking people to drop their cherished belief. In fact, there are many people who believe in the tooth fairy. But so long that this neo-Darwinian ideology remains intellectually stupid and morally indefensible, they can leave me out of it.

Going back to Putin, he said in 2013:

“People in many European countries are ashamed, and are afraid of talking about their religious convictions. [Religious] holidays are being taken away or called something else, shamefully hiding the essence of the holiday.”[23]

The Zionist regime, of course, made the false accusation that Putin was persecuting homosexuals. But Putin moved on to diffuse the regime’s silly argument this way: “We need to respect the rights of minorities to be different, but the rights of the majority should not be in question.”[24]

So, yes, Patrick Buchanan. Putin is one of us. Any serious politician who stands against the Mephistophelian establishment is one of us. As Friedrich Hansen of Asia Times put it,

“Make no mistake, Putin is not targeting homosexuals, as he made clear with his welcoming them to the Sotchi Olympics. It also seems only fair to remind Western readers that ever since the 1980s, Sotchi has been the center of Russia with a vibrant homosexual subculture. Rather, Putin is addressing the whole gamut of post-modern incarnations of the ‘sex and drugs’ revolution: binge drinking of both genders until the doctors move in, elite illicit drug use, unmanageable crime rates, surging divorce numbers, Hook-Up sex on campus, out of wedlock births, fathers and mothers in puberty, abortion on demand, public nudism and human copulation in parks, gay promiscuity with a good conscience, swinger clubs and darkrooms, ruthless Internet dating and pornography and what have you.”[25]

How does the regime respond? Well, you know the drill. Owen Matthews, a useful idiot, declared in the Spectator that Putin has a “new plan for world domination”![26] In order to slander Putin, Matthews indirectly linked him with Willi Munzenberg, a revolutionary Jew who wanted to take the Western world to perdition at any cost. Munzenberg was so passionate about his revolutionary goal that he wrote:

“We must organize the intellectuals and use them to make Western Civilization stink! Only then, after they have corrupted all its values and made life impossible, can we impose the dictatorship of the proletariat.”

When Putin said that Russia will “defend traditional values that have made up the spiritual and moral foundation of civilisation in every nation for thousands of years,” Matthews declared that Putin “is on to something.” What is it? Matthews told us:

“Putin’s new mission goes deeper than political opportunism. Like the old Communist International, or Comintern, in its day, Moscow is again building an international ideological alliance.”[27]

He again emphasized this point so that readers could get it: “And again, like the Comintern, Putin appears convinced that he is embarking on a world-historical mission.”[28] He moved on to talking about “Putin’s conservative Comintern.”

At the other end of the political spectrum, David Cameron likened Putin to Hitler.[29] John McCain, Lindsey Graham, among other usual suspects, have all placed Putin and Hitler on equal footing.[30]

Historian Paul Johnson (sad to say) even went so far as to say that Putin and Hitler are basically two sides of the same coin. Johnson said that Putin

“believes in a strong Stalinist state. His goal is to reverse the events of 1989–the end of the Soviet state and dissolution of its enormous empire. He seeks to do this by using what remains of Russia’s Stalinist heritage: the military, a huge stockpile of nuclear weapons and immense resources of natural gas and other forms of energy.”[31]

Johnson is sad because “there is no Churchillian voice to sound the alarm and call the democratic world to action.”[32]

Johnson has got to be kidding. What he ends up saying is that someone like Churchill needs to step up and start lying to the West about Putin. It is so sad to read silly comments such as this by a good historian like Johnson.

But the real question is this: why do the regime and their puppets hate Putin so much? Well, Putin suggested back in 2013 the Soviet government was guided by a dark force whose “ideological goggles and faulty ideological perceptions collapsed.”[33]

“The first Soviet government,” Putin added, “was 80-85 percent Jewish.”[34] Sounds like Putin has read Alexander Solzhenitsyn’s Two Hundred Years Together. If so, then it seems clear that he will continue to challenge the Zionist regime. Perhaps Putin has been encouraged by Solzhenitsyn’s bravery. It was Solzhenitsyn who said:

“And thus, overcoming our temerity, let each man choose: will he remain a witting servant of the lies, or has the time come for him to stand straight as an honest man, worthy of the respect of his children and contemporaries?”[35]

Perhaps Putin is saying enough is enough. And this maybe one reason why nearly all the major news outlets have been relentlessly slandering him. Kevin Barrett ended up his excellent article saying, “God bless President Putin, who is putting the fear of God into the New World Order.” Let us hope that he will never be weary in well doing, for in due season he shall reap, if he faints not.

[21] For a decent historical study on this, see for example Gertrude Himmelfarb, Darwin and the Darwinian Revolution(Chicago: Ivan R. Dee, 1962). Darwin was not as open-minded as people thought he was. “Former Darwin enthusiast St. George Mivart published anonymous articles critiquing Darwin’s theory. A gifted zoologist, Mivart would eventually publish a volume titled The Genesis of Species, an influential book that raised serious questions about the limits of natural selection, especially in its application to man. Far from rejecting Darwin wholesale, Mivart continued to embrace evolution and believe that the physical capacities of human beings had developed from the lower animals. But he continued to insist—like [Alfred] Wallace—that man was radically unique from the rest of creation and had a soul. Egged on by Thomas Huxley, Darwin became increasingly bitter over his former disciple’s criticisms, despite Mivart’s attempts to be personable in private correspondence and his public praise of the ‘invaluable labours and active brains of Charles Darwin and Alfred Wallace.” John G. West, Darwin Day in America: How Our Politics and Culture Have Been Dehumanized in the Name of Science (Wilmington: ISI Books, 2007).

“I care not what puppet is placed on the throne of England to rule the Empire. The man who controls Britain’s money supply controls the British Empire and I control the British money supply.” (Nathan Rothschild said (1777-1836)).

“The truth is that the United States, under its present administration, is the tool of the British Empire – the monetary financial empire which sits like a parasite, sucking the life out of Britain from the City of London and which has never gone away. (John Yoo in an article for the National Review – quoted by The UKColumn 4 Jan 2012″.

*

The League of Nations after WWI was seen as a failure. Nevertheless, It was the beginning of the final attempt of achieving total world domination by the “British Empire” and the “British Crown”, the NWO, – cover names for the rule of the world through the City of London by its masters, the Jesuits/ Rothschild dynasty.

The following Report is nearly 100 years old – and the British empire has apparently vanished in the meantime – and the USA has not returned to the British “Crown” – or has it? The Telegraph 18 Aug 2014: “The United Kingdom may now be a second-rate power, but the City’s unparalleled legacy as a global financial capital still underpins its pre-eminence.” Forbes found London and New York held a “hegemony” over the rest of the world.”

Henry Makow 4 oct. 2014: “The New World Order is an extension of the imperialism of the “Crown”,a clique of Jewish bankers and their Gentile accomplices devoted to “absorbing the wealth of the world” (in Cecil Rhodes words) and enslaving the human race. The first step was Wilson’s plan for the League of Nations “which we prepared for him.”

We are being colonized by this financial invisible invader. The bogus “War of Terror” obviously is directed against us. Our jobs and resources are exported. Illegal aliens are imported. The education system is used for mass indoctrination. News is controlled. Entertainment is filled with trivia, the occult, violence and pornography.”

The London City rules the US FED and Wall Street, The rulers of the USA, the Council on Foreign Relations, the AIPAC, the ADL, the whole Jewish Lobby are servants of the the Jesuits/Rothschild. The US was founded by Masons and Illuminati – who work for a united world under the British “Crown” – i.e. the Jesuit/Rothschild dynasty.

The immensely wealthy private bank of N. M. Rothschild & Son controlled the British Empirethen as well as now – took over the Bank of England in 1815.Then it controlled the press, the railroads and the industries with minor exceptions. It is building the Tower of Babel in defiance of God – since their God is Lucifer.

“The Colonel House Report (1919)” aka the “Col. E. M. House letter”: This report, or letter, was presented to the House of Representatives by Congressman Thorkelson of Montana, and is published in the Congressional Record of October 13, 1919, p. 598-604 inclusive. Its authenticity was discussed by members of the House and an effort was made to strike it from the Record, which failed.No minor official would dare write such a letter to the British Prime Minister (Lloyd George), or dare discuss the important subjects contained in it; except in the line of duty. It was not written by Col. E. M. House – a nom de plume. It discloses that it wasprobably written by Lord Northcliffe, who was at that time the head of the British Propaganda Department in enemy countries. He sustained toward Lloyd George the same intimate relationship that once existed between Woodrow Wilson and Colonel House, and this fact may explain the name he assumed.

This is the plan of the British Illuminati elite for their one-world government, the “British Empire”. The British Royal family is Jewish (see above and here in comment 2) and Masonic, servants of the Jesuits/Rothschilds.

“The Colonel House Report (1919)” aka the “Col. E. M. House letter”
“The World’s Peace Foundation has issued for us a series of League of Nations pamphlets, which, with our other literature, tax the mails to the limit of their capacity. Our film concerns are preparing an epoch-making picture entitled “The League of Nations.” In brief, our entire system of thought control is working ceaselessly,tirelessly, ruthlessly, to insure the adoption of the League. And it will be adopted, for business wants peace, the righteous cannot resist a covenant, and the politicians, after shadow-boxing for patronage purposes, will yield valiantly lest the fate of the wanton and wilful pursue them.

By these means we hope smoothly to overcome all effective opposition on the part of our colony America to entering the League — that is, the Empire. As soon as the League is functioning properly, His Majesty in response to loyal and repeated solicitation, might graciously be pleased to consent to restore to this (American) people their ancient right to petition at the foot of the throne; to confer the ancient rank and style of governor general upon our Ambassador, that this colony may enjoy a status inferior to no other colony’s.

Since that memorable day, September 19, 1877, on which the late Cecil Rhodes devised by will a fund “to and for the establishment, promotion, and development of a secret society (The Round Table)– the true aim of which and object of which shall be the extension ofBritish rule throughout the world, and especially the ultimate recovery of the United States of Americaas an integral part of the British Empire” — the energy and intelligence of England has not been spent in vain. It would perhaps be presumptuous of me to refer here to the admirable services rendered not only by LORD NORTHCLlFFE (the probable author of the report).

The Carnegie League to Enforce Peace and its affiliate League of Small Nations are even now leading the van in our fight. Only the last great battle remains to be fought — the battle to compel America´s acceptance of the terms of the League of Nations.”

From the moment of my arrival here, it was evident to me that such an Anglo-American alliance as would ultimately result in thepeaceful return of the American Colonies to the dominion of the Crown could be brought about only with the consent of the dominant group of the controlling clans.

For those who can afford the universities, we are, as I have already mentioned, plentifully supplying British-born or trained professors, lecturers, and presidents. British-born editors and reporters now create imperial sentiment in most American newspapers. A Canadian-born admiral now heads the United States Naval College.

Through the Red Cross, the Scout movement, the YMCA, the church, and other humane, religious, and quasi-religious organizations, we have created an atmosphere ofinternational effort which strengthens the idea of unity of the English-speaking world. In the co-ordination of this work, Mr. Raymond Fosdick, formerly of theRockefeller Foundation, has been especially conspicuous.

As the consortium for China, and the security company for Mexico show, our brokers and their aids have become the unchallenged financiers of the world. We have been particularly fortunate in our fiscal agents here, Messrs Pierpont Morgan & Company.Lamont and Davidson gave you valuable aid at the peace conference. They loaned $200,000,000 to Japan that our ally might build a fleet to compete with America on the Pacific carrying routes. Their attempts to retain for us control of the international mercantile marine are well known to you.

Through our fiscal agents we have become the world’s purchasers. Moreover, the war has made us the custodian of the greater part of the world’s raw materials and we now largely control the oil fields of the world and thereby the world’s transportation and industry. This control would enable us to exert such pressure as would make American industrial interests amenable to His Majesty’s pleasure.In the financial world the Anglo-American alliance is a well-established fact.

The City of London is an independent state marking its limits by the symbol of the Devil: dragons. The world economy is ruled from here.

We must quickly act to transfer its (US) dangerous sovereignty to the custody of the Crown (City of London). We must, in short, now bring America within the Empire. The first visible step in this direction has been taken; President Wilson has accepted and sponsored the plan for a League of Nationswhich we prepared for him(Rothschild puppet Edward Grey – see above). We have wrapped this plan in the peace treaty so that the world must accept from us the League or a continuance of the war. The League is in substance (the Jesuit/Rothschild) Empire with America admitted on the same basis as our other colonies.

The Americans must see that far from surrendering their independence to the League they are actually extending their sovereignty by it. Pres. Wilson alone can satisfy them on this. He alone can father an anti-Bolshevik act which judicially interpreted — will enable appropriate punitive measures to be applied to any American who may be unwise enough to assert that America must again declare her independence. And he alone, therefore, is qualified to act for us as first president of the League.”

Jesuit Pope Francis I has a coats of arms full of pagan symbols – turned upside down it shows the satanic pentagram (left). On 28/29 June 1963, The Vatican alongside with Albert Pike’s Southern division of the Scottish Rite Freemasonry celebrated a black mass in the Cappella Paolina in the Vatican – making Satan the head of the Church. Right: Detail from the Jesuit College.

4 Responses to The NWO is the British Empire – the Whole World to Belong to the Rothshild/Jesuit City of London.

Your report makes it appear that the Jesuits are on equal footing with the Rothschilds. They are even mentioned first in the name combo, meaning they are even slightly higher.
Is there evidence that they are equals or better? If they are equals, at least half of the decisions they make should lean to the Jesuit side, as opposed to specific Rothschild interests. Is there evidence that anything has gone the Jesuit way that wasn’t the first choice of the Rothschilds?
If they were equals during the days of Weishaupt, are they still today?
What would the Jesuits of today be without the Rothschilds, and vice versa?

http://www.reddit.com/r/Rothschild/comments/1s3u4b/vatican_bank_of_america/The Rothschild family is a loyal hofjuden family who serve the Papal Caesar and Jesuits. The Rothschilds are known as the Guardians of the Vatican Treasury showing their extremely.The Rothschilds are known as the Guardians of the Vatican Treasury showing their extremely close relationship with the Vatican through the Jesuit Order. This alliance goes back to the 18th Century when the Pope suppressed the Jesuit Order from 1773. The Jesuits use the Order of Malta (along with Opus Dei and the Equestrian Order of the Holy Sepulchre of Jerusalem) to control the banking system through groups like The Worshipful Company of Mercers (based in ancient Londinium). All ownership on Earth goes to the Papacy as early as 1302 onwards starting with Papal Bull Unam Sanctam. The Vatican is the wealthiest corporation on the face of the planet. Not only do the Vatican own all the true wealth.Today the Ancient Londinium (City of London) is the continuation of that ancient Aragon power within the new Holy Roman Empire which was cemented from 1814 onwards with the Congress of Vienna and 1822 with the Treaty of Verona.

If you are not an American you will understand why your country is on its present course, as it too is controlled by the Jesuit General through his select Jesuits, Knights of Malta, Shriner Freemasons, the Knights of Columbus, and the Illuminati’s Masonic, Cabalistic, Labor Zionist, Sabbatian Frankist (named after the Black Pope’s baptized Jacob Frank), Jewish House of Rothschild. For the Order controlled the infamous House of Rothschild since no later than the French Revolution and Napoleonic Wars, after which Jesuit-led Crusade the Rothschild family was surnamed the “Guardians of the Vatican Treasury.”
Eric Jon Phelps, „Vatican Assassins”, 3rd Ed., p.90http://vaticannewworldorder.blogspot.dk/2012/03/rothschild-dynasty-is-jesuit-created.html

Adam Weishaupt frequented the Jesuit school at Ingolstadt; Germany, for 7 years. Die Deutsche Biographie schreibt ww.deutsche-biographie.de/sfz84871.html: Obviously, the constitution of the jesuits were Weishaupt´s model.

Baron Adolpg Knigge, a renegade Illuminatus member, accused Weishaupt of “Jesuitism”, and suspected him to be a “jesuit in disguise” (Nachtr., I, 129)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolph_Freiherr_Knigge

The Illuminati “all-seeing eye of Lucifer” is historically a Jesuit symbol they have used for hundreds of years. That is why medieval ducat coins and Catholic cathedrals all over the world are adorned with pyramids and all-seeing eyes. Even today, Jesuit universities incorporate the all-seeing eye into their Alpha Sigma Nu honor society logo.http://jesuits.webs.com/

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/europe/freemasons-rosicrucians.htm Pope Clement XIV published his famous bull, Dominas redemptor, of July 21, 1773, by which the Society of Jesus was totally abolished in all the states of Christendom. Following the suppression of the Jesuits in 1773, members of that order in considerable numbers, attracted by the rapid growth and the pretentious occultism of the Rosicrucians, had united with the latter system. The Rosicrucians were a branch of Freemasonry notorious for the absurdity of its pretensions and its shameless pandering to the popular desire for occultism. In the new Rosicrucian order, there was little resemblance to the pretended old one ; but the greatest to the Jesuits. The Skull and Cross-bones are Rosicrucian symbols and the Degree is therefore purely Rosicrucian. The greatest enemies of the so-called “Rosicrucians” were the Illuminati, a secret organization, radiating throughout the whole of Germany.The Masons opened their ranks to anyone who was supposed to be a Rosicrucian, and that if the latter succeeded in making the brothers believe that he was actually such a favoured person, he would at once gain a great deal of influence in the lodge. Jesuits were not slow to see their advantage, and to gain admission to the lodges under the disguise of Rosicrucians. At the Wilhelmsbad Congress 1981, the Illuminati took power of the Masonic lodgeshttp://web.archive.org/web/20040812163419/http://user.pa.net/~drivera/fw1.htm.

Consequently: The Jesuits are the most renowned Masons, the Rosicrucians, indeed, they even claim to have founded Freemasonry. Therefore, it is interesting that Mayer Amschel Rothschild´s 5 sons were all Masons, http://euro-med.dk/?p=30519 – i.e. the subjected themselves to the Jesuit system to rule the world

Bibliothecapleyadeshttp://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/vatican/esp_vatican37.htm The Jesuit Order is since 1814 in complete control of the – obscenely wealthy – Vatican institution (and its Catholic clergy hierarchy) and presently also controls various other organizations together with the Military Order of Malta, such as:

the United Nations

NATO

European Commission

Council on Foreign Relations

various central banks

big corporations

secret services

numerous societies and cults, such as Freemasonry (“The Brotherhood”) and Opus Dei

Especially over the last 200 years, and in particular the last 100 years, the power of the Vatican-masonic network has covertly been increased tremendously due to several factors:

Social-techno policies: industrialization (and the later service economy), urbanization, educational regulation (increased propaganda propagation) and large-scale industrial proxy-warfare (especially since World War I during 1914-1918).

Political and religious globalization.

The major goals of globalization and the underlying collectivism ideologies (centralized-socialism, communism, fascism) were to:

Diminish personal/tribal/national self-reliance capabilities

Weaken the family bonds

Replace native culture

Increase their economic-parasite grip, through numerous pan-national organizations and their projects.

Alongside the “Theater of Warfare” and media psy-ops, globalization is a core part of the new Counter-Reformation!

———————————————————

Catholic Church vs NWO

1903-1914

“TO FIGHT AGAINST PAPACY IS A SOCIAL NECESSITY AND CONSTITUTES THE CONSTANT DUTY OF FREEMASONRY.”

The Reluctant Pope

Pope Leo XIII once given a most terrifying vision wherein he beheld Satan and his agents soon to be reigning triumphantly over the world. The Holy Father died a short time later, on July 20, 1903. On that mournful occasion Cardinal Sarto, knowing of the unequaled evils of the times to come, said that the Church must choose only a very holy man for her next pope, and he urged Venice to “pray that God may send to His Church a Shepherd after His own Heart.”

The prayers were answered, though hardly in the way that the Patriarch expected — or wanted. God, however, did send one of the greatest and holiest supreme pontiffs in history — only the second pope in five hundred years to be canonized a saint.

Pius X is called “the reluctant Pope” because few have so strongly resisted the call to succeed the Prince of the Apostles as he. Did he do so out of humility? Yes, of course. But true humility in a saint is a practical virtue, not an empty social mannerism.

Giuseppe Sarto knew what tremendous ordeals and sorrows would befall the next Roman Pontiff, and as the conclave votes increasingly mounted in his favor, he vigorously protested, claiming to be an “unworthy and incompetent” candidate. The holy prelate was dissuaded only by Cardinal Ferrari’s sobering suggestion of a worse fate in refusing: “Go back to Venice, if you wish, but until your dying day you will be plagued with qualms of conscience.”

Giuseppe finally resigned himself to the inevitable and declared, “I accept the Pontificate as a cross.” For days after the election he could not restrain the tears welling up from his profoundly sad and humble heart. This great agony that he willingly accepted with the Papacy, thereby becoming a saint, cannot be fully understood, however, without some awareness of the little-known background of those forces that met in collision impact against his stormy Pontificate.

In the Eighteenth Century two groups ranked foremost amongst the enemies of Catholicism: The Masons, and the so-called “free-thinking philosophers.” The Masons were bonded together in their wicked conclaves by a covetousness of the Church’s supreme authority in the world and a determination to destroy her.

So too with the “free-thinkers” — men like Rousseau, Voltaire, Frederick the Great, and others, whose degenerate doctrines had been condemned by the infallible Guardian of Truth — who likewise shared a consuming hatred of the Catholic Faith.

“It must be destroyed by a hundred invisible hands,” they brazenly proclaimed. “It is necessary that the philosophers should course through the streets to destroy it, as its missionaries course over the earth to propagate it. . . . Let us crush the wretch!”

The very worst of these elements later were welded into a much stronger, rigidly unified, and infinitely more ambitious force, thus producing the greatest menace of all time both to the Church and society. By its earliest identity, it was known as the Order ofIlluminati (Enlightened Ones).

It was founded on May 1, 1776 — the original May Day now celebrated as the central holiday of the Communist empire — by Adam Weishaupt, who was also an apostate Catholic, whose genius for evil seems to have been inspired directly by the fallen Angel of Light himself, Lucifer.

Weishaupt’s diabolical plan was to tear down all existing forms of government and order, to abolish all “religious superstition,” and to replace them with a universal tyranny he called the “New World Order”: “These powers [priests and princes] are despots, when they do not conduct themselves by its [the Order’s] principles; and it is our duty to surround them with its members….

We must do our utmost to procure the advancement of Illuminati into all important offices.” And he added, “By this plan we shall direct all mankind. In this manner, and by the simplest of means, we shall set all in motion and in flames.”

Weishaupt never had any intention of competing with Masonry in that regard. On the contrary, because its secretive structure was tailor-made for his designs, he wanted to take it over. And that is exactly what he did, by infiltrating key influential positions of Masonic ranks with his own agents. Masonry by this time had spread like a vaporous plague across Europe and much of America.

When its international convention, called the Congress of Wilhelmsbad, was held in 1782, “Illuminated Freemasonry” was unanimously acclaimed as the only “pure” Masonry. The Order of the Illuminati thereby took control of Masonic lodges and their associated secret societies through the western world, and used them as the principal means of advancing the Order’s conspiratorial network into every sphere and activity of life.

The undiminished ambitions and successes of this satanic force for over two centuries make for a horrifying study in themselves. We can catch some tiny glimpse of it, and at the same time shatter the fatal fantasy of Masonry’s being just another “benevolent fraternity,” through the incredibly bold and candid Letter to the Sovereign Pontiff, written in 1937 by Albert Lantoine, a thirty-third degree Mason who proposed a “truce,” if not a reconciliation, between the Church and Freemasonry.

Marxism–Leninism is a communist ideology and political philosophy founded/created by Rothschild to usurp nation state wealth into his controlled central bank. Communism/Sovietism was officially based upon the theories of Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels whom Rothschild hired to create the ideology. This ideology was first put into practice when he financed Vladimir Lenin to usurp Russia’s Monarchy.

Here are some of his random remarks: “We are freethinkers–you are believers.” “Freemasonry seeks to exalt man; the Church to exalt God.” “We are the servants of Satan. [He later corrected himself: “I should have said; servants of Lucifer.’”] You, the guardians of truth, are the servants of God.” “…Your God cannot pardon the Rebellious Angel, and that Angel will never submit or renounce his dominion. But need we remain enemies?”

Freemasonry is incompatible with the Catholic faith. Freemasonry teaches a naturalistic religion that espouses indifferentism, the position that a person can be equally pleasing to God while remaining in any religion. Masonry is a parallel religion to Christianity.

The New Catholic Encyclopedia states, “Freemasonry displays all the elements of religion, and as such it becomes a rival to the religion of the Gospel. It includes temples and altars, prayers, a moral code, worship, vestments, feast days, the promise of reward and punishment in the afterlife, a hierarchy, and initiative and burial rites” (vol. 6, p. 137).

The Illuminati aka; Free Masonry attempts at all things to mimic Christianity in the opposite direction aka; diaboline.

1914-1922

“TO FIGHT AGAINST PAPACY IS A SOCIAL NECESSITY AND CONSTITUTES THE CONSTANT DUTY OF FREEMASONRY.”

“The coming of a world state is longed for by all the worst and most distorted elements. This [Ed. Note: one-world] state, based on the principles of absolute equality of men and a community of possessions, would banish all national loyalties. In it no acknowledgment would be made of the authority of a father over his children, or of God over human society. If these [Ed. Note: one-world government] ideas are put into practice, there will inevitably follow a reign of unheard-of terror.” (In Bonum Sane, 1920)

— Pope Benedict XV

“Thou art Kepha and upon this kepha I will build my Church.” Original Aramaic

“Thou art Rock and upon this rock I will build my Church.”

Matt 16:18

“and the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and beat upon that house, but it did not fall, because it had been founded on the rock”

Matt 7:24-25

Pope Pius X

The Illuminati found great advantage in fomenting violent insurrections such as, and beginning with, the French Revolution in 1789. The same terrorists began in 1791 to confiscate the papal States.

In 1797 they invaded Italy. The following year Napoleon, having been raised to power by the conspirators, seized all the Papal States, and Pope Pius VI was taken captive. These vile enemies of the Faith “were already rejoicing that the Papacy and the Church had come to an end” when the captive Pontiff died. The their dismay, in 1800 Pius VII was elected — in exile. the Papal States were recovered, but only for a time.

Meanwhile, the seizure of the other ecclesiastical properties went on. Terrorist activities were renewed in 1830 during the brief Pontificate of Pius VIII. And throughout most of the Nineteenth Century the revolutionaries and secret societies — including Socialists, the Carbonari, Circulo Romano, and “Young Italy” — continued their vicious assaults on the popes, who served as the focal point for inciting hatred of the old order standing in the way of “democracy.” None, however, suffered more than Pius IX. Bloody insurrections exploded again during his reign. The Papal States were finally seized forever.

His prime minister and a papal prelate were brutally murdered. The Pope himself was forced to flee from Rome in disguise to escape death. And once more the radicals were openly boasting that they had at last annihilated the Catholic Church through the Papacy.

The advantages of revolution to those arch-conspirators who fostered it were many. Not the least of these was that it drew suspicion away from their primary means of amassing power in their hands — that being the quiet infiltration of their agents into the most important levels of influence and authority. And this method of subversion, once begun, was never interrupted.

“Beloved Son-Greetings and Apostolic Blessing. The eminent virtues which, in the course of your long sacerdotal career, you have shown with such resplendent light added to the high consideration in which you are held by Our Venerable Brother, Jauvier Granito di Belmonte, Cardinal of the Holy Roman Church, Bishop of Albano, as also by the Cardinal Archbishop of Paris, have prompted Our decision to honor you with a great homage.

“We do know that you fulfill the obligations of your sacred ministry in the most exemplary manner; that you have the most ardent solicitude for the eternal salvation of the faithful and that with constancy and courage you have upheld the rights of the Catholic Church — and have done so even at the peril of your own life. You have worked against the enemies of religion and We know that you spare neither work nor expenses to spread among the people your great works on those questions . . .”

The learned scholar Monsignor Join was alert to the impending success of their monstrous scheme, when Cardinal Mariano Rampolla, who was later discovered to have a close affinity with the French Masons and who Jouin was certain belonged to a lodge, entered the conclave of 1903 favored with sufficient popularity to become the next Pope. Jouin implored Emperor Franz Joseph of Austria to use his archaic — yet seemingly still valid — power of veto to block Rampolla. It is clear that the Emperor was in no way pleased in having to interfere with the sacred function of a papal election. Yet it seemed to him an unescapable task.

Letter : from His Eminence Cardinal Gasparri to Monseigneur Jouin on June 20, 1919.
From the State Secretary of His Holiness.

“The Sovereign Pontiff with his paternal benevolence has accepted the homage of your new study on ‘Laguerre Maconnique ‘ (The Masonic War).

“It is with unerring judgment that in the work which you have undertaken, you have endeavored to project light, by means of documentation and irrefutable proofs, upon the inept and essentially anti-Catholic doctrine of Freemasonry, a doctrine issued from deism born of the Reformation, a doctrine which, as it is today clearly evident, leads fatally to the very denial of God, to social atheism, to irreligious teaching and impiety and is greatly detrimental to nations; it aims at removing from every association every trace of religion and every church mediation.

“Above all, in spite of all lies which oftentimes deceive the Catholics themselves, you have carefully and most particularly clearly shown the identity of Freemasonry evident everywhere and always, and the continuity of the plans set by the Sects and whose master design is the destruction of the Catholic Church.

“His Holiness takes pleasure in congratulating you and encouraging your work whose influence can, indeed, be so fruitful. It can induce the faithful to be vigilant and help them to fight efficaciously against everything tending to the destruction of the social order as well as of religion.

“As evidence of the celestial gifts bestowed upon you and as a testimony of his paternal benevolence, the Holy Father, from his heart bestows upon you the Apostolic Blessing.

“Thanking, you also for the copy of your book which you graciously sent me, and with my personal congratulations, I pray you to believe, Monseigneur, in the assurance of my complete devotion.

(signed) + P. Cardinal Gasparri .”

The conclave of sixty-two cardinals was sealed off in the Vatican on July 31. At the first scrutiny Cardinal Rampolla led with twenty-four ballots; Cardinal Sarto, unknown to most of the Scared College, had only five — the fewest number of votes of any of the candidates. The second scrutiny increased Rampolla’s votes to twenty-nine, and it was then the Cardinal Puzyna conveyed the Austrian Emperor’s intention to use his veto. (This obviously was the most respectable manner Franz Joseph could find to pursue his unhappy duty.)

Rampolla Caught & Stopped

Years later it became known that a certain Bishop Jouin, founder of the renowned journal R.I.S.S (Revue Internationale des Sociétés Secrètes / International Revue of Secret Socie-ties), had undeniable proof that Cardinal Rampolla was not simply a member of some Freemasonry lodge or other but that he was Grand Master of an extremely secretive sect, the ‘Ordo Templi Orientalis’. Scribd

It is remarkable that this point agrees entirely with what is stated in the articles written by Mr. Hubert Luns:

Rampolla rose quickly and with skill to stir the indignation of the conclave, saying, “I thoroughly deplore this serious blow aimed by a civil power at the dignity of the Sacred College and at the liberty of the Church in choosing its Head, and therefore I protest with the utmost vehemence.” None of the cardinals knew the reason for the intended veto, of course, and so the sentiment was widely supported. Nevertheless, Austria was the one daughter of the Church still faithful to her, and this also had to be considered. Rampolla’s ballots did increase, but only out of protest, only briefly and only one vote before they diminished.

Meanwhile the votes for Cardinal Sarto grew — all the more so as the humble soul tearfully begged that he not be considered any further. Bishop Merry del Val tells of discovering Giuseppe in the darkened chapel, praying and weeping profusely before the tabernacle, some time after the fourth balloting when it was apparent that the Patriarch might be elected. “Never shall I forget the impression produced upon me by the sight of such intense anguish….I felt I had been in the presence of a saint.”

The Sacred College disregarded Giuseppe’s pleas, and on the fifth scrutiny chose him to be the Vicar of Christ. When finally persuaded to accept the election as the will of God, he was asked what name he would take. Reflecting on the recent past and on the trials he knew to lie ahead, he answered: “As the Popes who have suffered much for the Church in the last century have been known as Pius, I too shall take that name.”

Jesuit Says Pius XI’s Document Was Prophetic

Yes Hitler Was A Rothschild Czar

Attempting The Illuminati’s

2nd Attempt At New World Order.

Pope Pius XI 1922

For the first time the word “Laicism” (which means irreligious teaching) is to be found in a Pontifical document; it is the fatal and sought for result of both the Masonic doctrine and its direct action. This fact allows me to add to the list of all the Sovereign Pontiffs who denounced and condemned Judeo-Masonry; the name of our present Pope, Pius XI, in his Encyclical“Maximam grasissimamque“ of July 18, 1924, the Pope most clearly has lifted his voice against “Laicism” (irreligious teaching) in the following terms:

“Whatetier Pius X did condemn, We likewise condemn it. Every time that the word ‘Laicite‘ (irreligious teaching) is used to convey a feeling or an intention contrary or foreign to God or religion, We condemn it. We fully reprove this ‘Laicism’ and We openly declare that it must be reproved.”

In my own case, during the private audience which on November 16, 1923, he granted me, His Holiness, Pius XI, asked me to continue my fight against Freemasonry because, said he:

“Masonry is our mortal enemy.”

Later, as I was recollecting the kind words addressed to me by Pope Benedict XV in the decree “Proestantes“:

“With constancy and courage you have upheld the rights of the Catholic Church and have done so even at the peril of your life.” and adding that so far I had not yet become the victim of Freemasons, His Holiness replied in a paternal manner:

“Did not Saint Augustine, who is the patron of your parish in Paris, speak of the martyrs of the pen? (The Parish of which Monseigneur Jouin was head for many years and until his death was called Saint Augustine.)

Such a denunciation of “Laicism” as well as the encouragement given me to continue the fight against Masonry confirm the Pontifical condemnations pronounced since Pope Clement XII; it also follows the inspired words of Pope Leo XIII:

“In the realm of spiritual salvation, there is no middle way:

one either follows the road to perdition or else fights without limit to the very end.”

“Instaurare Omnia in Christo”

Establish All In Christ

Pope Pius X

His Holiness Pope Pius X issued his first encyclical letter on October 4, 1903, recalling “with what tears and urgent prayers” he had tried “to fend off the formidable burden of the Papacy.” “We were terrified beyond all else,” He explained, “by the disastrous state of human society today. For who can fail to see that society at the present time, more than in any age past, is suffering from a terrible and deep-rooted malady, which, developing every day and eating into its inmost being, is dragging it to destruction?”

One senses in these remarks a foreknowledge of World War I, which immediately was to follow the saint’s death, and the coming of still greater horrors, which were revealed at Fatima fourteen years later. “You understand, Venerable Brethren, what this disease is: apostasy from God…”

His language becomes more prophetic: “All who consider these matters have a right to fear that such perversion of mind may be the beginning of the evils predicted for the end of Time — their first contact, as it were, with the world — and that in very truth the son of perdition, of whom the Apostle speaks, may have already appeared in our midst. . .

“Without any doubt there is a desire in all hearts for peace….But how foolish is he who seeks this peace apart from God; for if God be driven out, justice is banished, and once justice fails, all hope of peace is lost. . .

1939-1958

“TO FIGHT AGAINST PAPACY IS A SOCIAL NECESSITY AND CONSTITUTES THE CONSTANT DUTY OF FREEMASONRY.”

“…the roots of modern apostasy lay in scientific atheism, dialectical materialism, rationalism, illuminism, laicism, and Freemasonry – which is the mother of them all.”
– Pope Pius XII, Address to the Seventh Week Pastoral Adaptation Conference in Italy (1958).

It is this accursed Sect whose perversion was stigmatized by Pope Pius IX when he named it: ‘THE SYNAGOGUE OF SATAN.’” — Monseigueur Jouin, speaking of Judeo-Masonry

The successors of Pius XII approved the Code of Canon Law of 1917 which explicitly condemned the Masons: “All those who enroll their names in the sect of Freemasons or similar associations which plot against the Church or the legitimate civil authorities incur by this very fact the penalty of excommunication, absolution from which is reserved simply to the Holy See.” (Canon 2335). The revised Code of Canon Law of 1983 stipulates: “One who joins an association which plots against the Church is to be punished with a just penalty; one who promotes or moderates such an association, however, is to be punished with an interdict.” (Canon 1374)

We have spread the spirit of revolt and false liberalism among the nations of the gentiles so as to persuade them away from their faith and even to make them ashamed of professing the precepts of their Religion and obeying the commands of their Church. We have brought many of them to boast of being atheists, and more than that, to glory in being descendants of the ape! We have given them new theories, impossible of realization, such as Communism, Anarchism, and Socialism, which are now serving our purpose….The stupid Gentiles have accepted them with the greatest enthusiasm, without realizing that those theories are ours, and that they constitute our most powerful instrument against themselves….”

“We have blackened the Catholic Church with the most ignominious calumnies, we have stained her history and disgraced even her noblest activities. We have imputed to her the wrongs of her enemies, and have thus brought these latter to stand more closely by our side…. So much so, that we are now witnessing, to our greatest satisfaction, rebellions against the Church in several countries…. We have turned her clergy into objects of hatred and ridicule, we have subjected them to the contempt of the crowd… We have caused the practice of the Catholic Religion to be considered out of date and a mere waste of time….”

“We have induced some of our children to join the Catholic body, with the explicit intimation that they should work in a still more efficient way for the disintegration of the Catholic Church, by creating scandals within her.”

“We know well that there are many who…unite together on the side of order, as they call it. Alas, their hopes are vain, their labours wasted! Only those can be on the side of order and have the power to restore calm in the midst of this upheaval, who are on the side of God…

Paul A. Fisher [1991] reports in his book Their God is the Devil, that between 1829 and 1836 the legislatures of the States of New York, Pennsylvania and Massachusetts investigated Freemasonry and found it to be “a moral evil — a distinct independent government within our own government, and beyond the control of the laws of the land by means of its secrecy, and the oaths and regulations which its subjects are bound to obey, under penalties of death” (p. 18.)

“This return of nations to reverence for the Divine Majesty and Sovereignty, whatever other efforts may be made to bring it about, can only come through Jesus Christ….Now what is the way that will lead us to Jesus Christ? We have it before us: the Church. Behold, therefore, Venerable Brethren, the great work that is entrusted to Us, to Us and to you also. We have to bring back mankind, now straying far from the Wisdom of Christ, to obedience to the Church….”

By “the Church,” His Holiness did not mean some vague, unspecified entity, generally defined today by modern theologians as the boundless “spirit” of Christianity. when Bishop Delany of Manchester, New Hampshire, met in audience with Pius X, the Pope asked him how many Catholics there were in his diocese. “Their number is about one-third of the population,” the bishop replied. ‘You must strive to make the remaining two-thirds Catholics also,” said Pius, and “good Catholics” at that.

Thus the Shepherd of mankind set down in his first encyclical the goal he would pursue to his last breath:

“The sole aim of Our Pontificate will be to restore all things in Christ (instaurare omnia in Christo).”

In this purpose the holy Pontiff’s efforts were directed before all else at restoring piety among the faithful — the same remedy he had used so often and so effectively in the past. And toward that end his most outstanding achievements followed from the two great devotions he sought to renew in increased measure.

One was to the Blessed Mother. The Golden Jubilee of the proclamation of the dogma of the Immaculate Conception provided Pius with the opportunity to urge this intensified devotion in his second encyclical, issued in 1904.

The encyclical was as beautiful and inspiring as Saint Louis Marie de Montfort’s True Devotion to The Blessed Virgin. (In fact the language of both writings is strikingly similar, which is not surprising, since Saint Pius highly esteemed True Devotion and granted an Apostolic Blessing to all who read it.)

His Holiness said, “There is no surer or easier way than Mary in uniting all men with Christ….It is necessary to recognize that upon Her, as upon the noblest after Christ, is built the faith of all ages….It is chiefly through Her that a way has been opened to obtain the knowledge of Christ; as no one ever knew so profoundly as She did, so no one can be more competent as a guide and teacher in knowing Christ.”

The other great devotion, by which to restore holiness in the faithful and thus “restore all things in Christ,” was to Christ Himself, in the Blessed Sacrament. Over the centuries the concern for safeguarding the sacredness of this precious Gift from irreverent reception or even sacrilegious abuse had led to certain prescribed limitations as to how often the Sacrament should be received. Unfortunately, by the turn of the present century, such caution, with the perverse influence of the still-surviving heresy of Jansenism had been so exaggerated as to give rise to the notion that frequent Communion was only for holy people. Many received the Holy Eucharist no more than once a year. Communion more frequent than once a week was allowed only by special permission, and at that only in select instances.

“Holy Communion is the shortest and surest way to Heaven,” said Saint Pius. “The custom of keeping the faithful away out of pretended respect for the august Sacrament had been the cause of numerous evils.”

And so in 1905 he issued a decree: “Let Holy Communion, frequent and even daily, a thing so desired by Jesus Christ and His Church, be available to all the faithful of whatever condition of life they may be, so that it may never be denied to anybody who is in the state of grace and has a right intention.”

A few weeks later he set forth further instruction:

“It is necessary that children be nourished by Christ before they are dominated by their passions, so they can with greater courage resist the assaults of the devil, of the flesh, and their other enemies, whether internal or external.”

For it regrettably was also a custom that children not be allowed to make their First Communion before the age of ten, twelve, or sometimes even fourteen, and then they usually would have to wait another year to receive Our Lord again. A second decree was issued, determining seven years as the average age for a child’s first reception of the Eucharist, although it could even be earlier in many cases.

“Children from their tenderest years should cling to Jesus Christ, live His life, and find protection from the dangers of corruption.”

A woman once brought her little boy to receive the great Pope’s blessing. Pius asked, “How old is he?” And the mother answered, “He is four, and in two or three years I hope he will make his First Communion.” His Holiness then spoke to the child who had crept onto his lap: “Whom do you receive in Holy Communion?” Without hesitation the boy replied, “Jesus Christ.” “And who is Jesus Christ?” “Jesus Christ is God.” Needing no more assurance than that of the child’s sufficient use of reason, Pope Pius instructed his mother: “Bring him to me tomorrow and I will give him Holy Communion myself.”

Hundreds of First Communicants made pilgrimages to Rome to thank their beloved Holy Father for allowing them by his decree to receive Jesus at an early age. Saint Pius always welcomed them with tears in his eyes, embracing each one individually. Such was the Pontiff’s tender, Christlike love for children. And the little innocents, known for their sometimes amazing powers of discernment, loved him as much as if he himself were the Savior. When he would bend to them and offer a word of paternal guidance, some looking up into his gently and holy face would answer in touching simplicity, “Yes Jesus!” Indeed, was his majestic countenance unlike what might be imagined of the Beatific Vision?

Catholic Action was still another offensive strategy set in motion by the saintly apostle, to counter directly the snares of modern error and falsehood.

The social and economic spheres were the areas where the Socialists, directed by the higher powers of Masonry, were making the greatest headway towards the destruction of civilization, with their treacherous lies about “liberty, equality, brotherhood, and peace.”

So it was in those spheres that the Church would have to present herself, drive out Satan’s accomplices, and begin to guide society in all its endeavors back to Christ. “The field of Catholic Action is exceedingly vast: from it nothing whatsoever is excluded that in any way directly or indirectly pertains to the divine mission of the Church,” wrote Pope Pius.

“There is no need to remind you. Venerable Brethren, what prosperity and well-being, what peace and concord, what respectful obedience to authority, what excellence in government might be obtained and maintained in the world, could we but realize the ideal of Christian civilization.”

The blessing and protection of Heaven are at all times necessary but especially so in times of public distress and danger. The General hopes and trusts that every officer and man will endeavor to live and act as becomes a Christian soldier, defending the dearest rights and liberties of his country.

~ General George Washington

But he did not fail to mention the insidious forces already arrayed to do battle against the Church in the same field:

“The Church knows that the gates of hell will not prevail against her. She knows, too, that she will ever encounter opposition, that her apostles go forth as lambs among wolves, that her faithful will always encounter hatred and disdain, just as her Divine Founder encountered them in full measure. But the Church moves forward unafraid, and while she spreads the Kingdom of God to regions which have hitherto not known the Gospel she also strives to repair the losses in the Kingdom already established.

To make all things new in Christ has ever been the watchword of the Church, as in a particular way it is Ours in the fateful moments through which We are now to give history its fulfillment by resuming everything in Him, all that is Heaven, all that is on earth, summed up in Him: to restore in Christ not only what properly pertains to the divine mission of the Church, in bringing souls to God, but also, as We have said, those things which spontaneously flow from this divine mission — Christian civilization in all and the single elements that make it up.

“In this second task the faithful laity must use all their forces to restore the social order, conscious of the necessity of rolling back the tide of ‘anti-Christian civilization,’ and of bringing Jesus Christ back to the family, the school, the whole of society….”

1958-1963

“TO FIGHT AGAINST PAPACY IS A SOCIAL NECESSITY AND CONSTITUTES THE CONSTANT DUTY OF FREEMASONRY.”

“Justice, right reason, and the recognition of man’s dignity cry out insistently for a cessation to the arms race,” he wrote. “The stockpiles of armaments which have been built up in various countries must be reduced all round and simultaneously by the parties concerned. Nuclear weapons must be banned. A general agreement must be reached on a suitable disarmament program, with an effective system of mutual control.”

In an unprecedented move, the United Nations held a conference to examine the contents of the encyclical.

Pope John XXIII proposed a new world order to be built on four pillars: truth, justice, love and freedom.

Recall that the Illuminati attempt to mimic all things in the opposite direction of The Roman Catholic Church. This has to do with especially when speaking about ‘New World Order’.

The Great Jubilee of the 3rd. Millennium of Christianity which began in the year 2000, is referenced as New Order or New World Order.

The Illuminati counters this with ‘New World Order’ but not based upon Truth, Justice, Love, & Freedom , but upon totalitarianism aka; lies, injustice, racism/hatred, & serfdom to their banking City of London.

1. Truth will build peace if every individual sincerely acknowledges not only his rights, but also his own duties towards others.

2 .Justice will build peace if in practice everyone respects the rights of others and actually fulfills his duties towards them.

3. Love/Charity will build peace if people feel the needs of others as their own and share what they have with others, especially the values of mind and spirit, which they possess.

4. Freedom/Liberty will build peace and make it thrive if, in the choice of the means to that end, people act according to reason and assume responsibility for their own actions.

This encyclical represented for the first time a fundamental Catholic embrace of the human rights tradition as found in the U.N. Declaration of Human Rights. Many in the church at the time saw this as a church reversal and a moment in which Catholic values and wider values based on human dignity finally met on common grounds.

It was at this time The U.N. was not so corrupt, but as anyone can see now (2013), the Freemasons did not stand idly by for this union on Human Rights. The Popes now see the U.N. as archaic, debauched, and dead (2013).

If the “son of perdition” had not “already appeared in our midst,” as Saint Pius X speculated in 1903, there is no question that his prophets were busy preparing for his arrival — and had been for a long time. The grieved Supreme Pastor looked out all through his Pontificate upon a world that was recklessly abandoning the security of proven traditions and moral values to pursue the false promises of utopian paradise. The consequence was that many countries soon were found teetering on the brink of tyranny.

Italy, for all intents and purposes, might have been regarded as a mere colony, annexed to France by Masons who controlled both nations. So tragic, in fact, was the degenerate state of Italy that even in Rome itself, the seat of all Christendom, a Jew named Ernesto Nathan, who thoroughly despised Catholicism, had been installed as Mayor. Every year, on the anniversary of the armed entry into Rome of that blasphemous and brutal thug, Garibaldi, Mayor Nathan celebrate the occasion by delivering public addresses in which he contemptuously heaped unlimited insults on the Church.

Saddest of all to the venerable Pontiff were those countries in which Catholics were being openly persecuted, such as Germany, Portugal, Ecuador, and Macedonia. Elsewhere, as in Mexico and Russia, the same affliction was visibly approaching, promising even crueler torments. These and other grave problems existing in so many separate countries weighed oppressively on poor Pius, who was said to have “the greatest heart of any man living,” and who was moved to tears by the very sight of suffering. But let us briefly recount just one situation that by itself characterizes the whole rising tide of human misery with which the noble Pope had to contend.

Albert Pike, who later founded the Ku Klux Klan and prosecuted the Indian Wars, wrote a letter to Italian P-1 33rd Degree Grand Commander and Mafia founder Guiseppe Mazzini. In the letter Pike talked of a Brotherhood plan for three World Wars. The first, he said, would destroy czarist Russia and create a Communist “bogeyman” which the bankers could employ to justify their foreign interventions around the world. The second, Pike said, would be used to create Israel, which would become a mercenary force for the international bankers, protecting Middle Eastern oil interests for Rothschild and Rockefeller combines.

The Third World War, Pike described the events that would unfold as pretext for WWIII, “We must provoke a social cataclysm which in all its horror…everywhere the citizens obliged to defend themselves against the world minority of revolutionaries…will receive the true light through the pure doctrine of Lucifer, brought finally out into public view.

In June 2001 & 3 months prior to 9/11, a female Russian doctor stated in a Pravda column that the US would be subject to a massive terrorist attack in late August 2001.

She was then asked what she believed was coming next. She suggested selling dollars and buying Russian rubles, saying that the secret group behind 911 was the most powerful force in the world, worth over $300 trillion.

She said this group would soon “strike America in the back” while it was down and that the next shoe to drop would be the decimation of the US economy. This “secret group” could only be the Illuminati Rothschild-led Eight Families.

The government of France was held firmly in the grasp of Masons like a tyrannical noose which they were anxious to tighten. Since France was an almost totally Catholic nation, however, their biggest obstacle was the Church. For this reason they had long ago avowed that “the Church and religion must be shattered.”

Meyer Amschel Rothschild (1744-1812) played a key role in advancing this monstrous conspiracy. He was a follower of the occult Cabbalism (or Lucifer worship) that is the basis of Illuminism and Freemasonry. (See Albert Pike, Morals and Dogma of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry.)

“We are the Fathers of all Revolutions-even of those which sometimes happen to turn against us. We are the supreme Masters of Peace and War. We can boast of being the creators of the REFORMATION! Calvin was one of our Children; he was of Jewish descent, and was trusted by Jewish authority and encouraged with Jewish finance to draft his scheme in the Reformation.”

“Martin Luther yielded to the influence of his Jewish friends, and again, by Jewish authority and with Jewish finance, his plot against the Catholic Church met with success….”

“Thanks to our propaganda, to our theories of Liberalism and to our misrepresentations of Freedom, the minds of many among the Gentiles were ready to welcome the Reformation. They separated from the Church to fall into our snare. And thus the Catholic Church has been very sensibly weakened, and her authority over the Kings of the Gentiles has been reduced almost to naught….”

“We are grateful to Protestants for their loyalty to our wishes-although most of them are, in the sincerity of their faith, unaware of their loyalty to us. We are grateful to them for the wonderful help they are giving in our fight against the stronghold of Christian Civilization, and in our preparations for the advent of our supremacy over the whole world and over the Kingdoms of the Gentiles.”

“We must destroy her without the least delay and without the slightest mercy. Most of the Press in the world is under our Control; let us therefore encourage in a still more violent way the hatred of world against the Catholic Church.”

Arago, a French Senator, in 1876 burst out with this infamous blasphemy:

“Get Thee hence, Crucified One, Who for 1800 years has held the world bound beneath Thy yoke. No more God, no more churches — we must crush the Infâme…. We must eliminate from French society all religious influence, under whatever form it presents itself.”

Another prominent Mason said at the close of the Grand Orient’s general assembly in 1902:

“Until we have completely done away with the religious congregations,…as long as we have not broken with Rome, denounced the Concordat, and re-established lay teaching definitely throughout this country, nothing will have been accomplished. This same apostle of “liberty” went on to add, “I drink to the Republic. For the Republic is simply Freemasonry emerged from its temples, as Freemasonry is the Republic masked by the aegis of our traditions and symbols. He was joined on this occasion by a like-minded comrade: “The triumph of the Galilean [Christ] has lasted twenty centuries. He is dying in His turn. The mysterious voice which in olden days on the mountains of Epirus announced the death of Pan, today announces the end of the deceitful God.”

The Masons/Illuminatis have also usurped the ‘All Seeing Eye Of Providence’ from The Roman Catholic Church, mock The Catholic’s Eucharist, etc.etc.etc.

All-Seeing Eye: The All-Seeing Eye of God looks out from the triangle, which represents the Trinity. This reminds us that God always watches over us in love (Ps. 33:18).

Never the less, the symbols really take a backseat to works. IOWs, the tree is known by its fruit.

With the same such hateful antipathy holding sway, therefore, the following resolution was carried at a Masonic assembly:

“It is the strict duty of a Freemason, if he is a member of Parliament, to vote for the suppression of the Budget des Cultes, for the suppression of the French embassy at the Vatican, and on all occasions to declare himself in favor of the separation of Church and State without abandoning the right of the State to police the Church.”

Accordingly, French Premier Waldeck-Rousseau determinedly sought after a breach with Rome without actually taking that final step himself. Why his reluctance? Combes, who later was to succeed the Premier, explained to the Senate in 1903:

“To denounce the Concordat just now, without sufficiently having prepared men’s minds for it, without provoking it and rendering it inevitable, would be bad policy on the part of the Government, by reason of the resentment which might be caused in the country. I do not say that the connection between Church and State will not some day be severed; I do not even say that that day is not near. I merely say that the day has not yet come.”

1963-1978

“TO FIGHT AGAINST PAPACY IS A SOCIAL NECESSITY AND CONSTITUTES THE CONSTANT DUTY OF FREEMASONRY.”

Now Contrast Henry Kissinger, responsible for genocide, receiving his Freemason/NWO recognition as a type of saint for freedom.

REMEMBER:

The New Catholic Encyclopedia states, “Freemasonry displays all the elements of religion, and as such it becomes a rival to the religion of the Gospel. It includes temples and altars, prayers, a moral code, worship, vestments, feast days, the promise of reward and punishment in the afterlife, a hierarchy, and initiative and burial rites” (vol. 6, p. 137).

The Illuminati aka; Free Masonry attempts at all things to mimic Christianity in the opposite direction aka; diaboline.

Pope Paul VI was attacked mercilessly for his Encyclical On ‘Humanae Vitae’ (Defense Of Life) which was Given at St. Peter’s, Rome, on the 25th day of July, the feast of St. James the Apostle, in the year 1968, the sixth of Our pontificate. This Encyclical was a death blow to the NWO designs for depopulation.

Venerable brothers, beloved sons, all men of good will, great indeed is the work of education, of progress and of charity to which We now summon all of you. And this We do relying on the unshakable teaching of the Church, which teaching Peter’s successor together with his brothers in the Catholic episcopate faithfully guards and interprets. And We are convinced that this truly great work will bring blessings both on the world and on the Church.

For man cannot attain that true happiness for which he yearns with all the strength of his spirit, unless he keeps the laws which the Most High God has engraved in his very nature.

These laws must be wisely and lovingly observed. On this great work, on all of you and especially on married couples, We implore from the God of all holiness and pity an abundance of heavenly grace as a pledge of which We gladly bestow Our apostolic blessing. Humanae Vitae & Credo Of The People Of God

Pope Pius VI exposed & censured ‘modernist’ Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre for sedevacantism (alleging ‘ironically’ Popes after Saint Pope Pius X promote modernism and thus ‘the seat is vacant’). So Lefebvre goes about doing his own thing in the name of Catholic ~ which is a big no no. On July 2, 1988, Pope John Paul II declared Archbishop Lefebvre, the four bishops illicitly consecrated by him, and those who adhere to Lefebvre’s movement to be in schism.

Pope Paul VI’s Post-Vatican II Announcement: Modernism “is the most dangerous revolution the Church has ever had to face and it is still scourging her severely”. Pope Paul VI went on to identify that Modernism’s Revolution is a process of self-demolition and it aims at driving the Church to the end of the road to perdition. The trinity of parents responsible for the perversion known as modernism are:

“We are the Fathers of all Revolutions-even of those which sometimes happen to turn against us. We are the supreme Masters of Peace and War. We can boast of being the creators of the REFORMATION! Calvin was one of our Children; he was of Jewish descent, and was trusted by Jewish authority and encouraged with Jewish finance to draft his scheme in the Reformation.” “Martin Luther yielded to the influence of his Jewish friends, and again, by Jewish authority and with Jewish finance, his plot against the Catholic Church met with success…. Albert Pike 33rd. Degree Freemason

Illuminationism” was simply the carrying out of the principles of “enlightenment”; in other words, it was Freemasonry and practical Liberalism adapted to the requirements of the age. New Advent

Pope Pius X

A series of measures were initiated, all calculated increasingly to provoke Saint Pius X to rash retaliation, or otherwise to force him to cower before the might of the Masonic “Republic” for the sake of saving Church properties. In the latter instance, of course, since the socialistic dogma, “Private ownership is theft,” was widely accepted in France, the Pope would appear to fit the role contemptibly described by the anticlericals — that of a capitalistic theocrat, hoarding Church wealth which had been wrung from the proletariat.

The Rothschild’s Illuminati Banking Cabal Worth $100 Trillion “The Rothschild Dynasty” by a Dr John Coleman asserted that the wealth of the Rothschild family (if all assets were liquidated) would reach $300 trillion.

And so the noose began to tighten, beginning with legislation that “laicized” school and State. The next step was the outlawing of the teaching of religion in the schools. Religious then were forbidden to teach anywhere in France. Furthermore, a law was enacted which provided that no Religious Order or Institute could exist unless approved by the government. Subsequently Church patrimony was seized. Religious Orders were suppressed and forced into exile. Bishops were denied contact with Rome. and the “Republic” demanded the prerogative of appointing its own bishops free of Rome’s interference.

Aug. 26 to Sept. 28, 1978.

Make sure you click the cc at the bottom of the video screen to read the captions.

About John Paul, Mother Teresa was quoted as saying, He has been the greatest gift of God, a sunray of God’s love shining in the darkness of the world.

It isn’t a surprise that John Paul, reigning for only thirty-three days, among the shortest reigns in papal history, is remembered in Italy as Il Sorriso di Dio: God’s Smile.

He died on September 28th, 1978.

Pope Pius X

The ultimate break was reached in 1905 with the Law of Separation of Church and State, nullifying the Napoleonic Concordat of 1802. The law established “Associations of Worship” whose function was to administer the property of churches. Very simply, it meant that the State set itself up as the supreme authority over the Church, confiscating all ecclesiastical property and reserving to itself the right to regulate all religious activities. If, then, Catholicism hoped to survive in France, it appeared that the Pope would have to submit — or rather surrender — to the usurped power of the Masonic regime.

With victory over the Church now seemingly imminent, and the way apparently clear for the total de-Christianization and subjugation of the country, the Masons were jubilant. “We have bound ourselves to the work of anti-clericalism, a work of irreligion,” boasted Viviani. “We have extinguished in the firmament lights which shall never be rekindled.”

But it was not to be. Saint Pius steadfastly refused to compromise with the government.

“Our conscience would not permit Us to tolerate any form of experiment on this question in order to save the French Catholics from the dangers which threaten them.”

In his encyclical, Vehementer, he condemned the theory of separation of Church and State as being completely false and an insult to God.

It is the primary duty of the State to assist its subjects in every way possible to reach their eternal salvation. In any Christian State separation from the Church is reprehensible….” Concerning the loss of ecclesiastical properties, he wrote to the French bishops:

“The Church has not yielded up her right to these possessions. They belong to the worship of God and have been ruthlessly confiscated.

The Church was faced with the choice between material ruin and the surrender of the rights given her by God. She courageously refused the latter though this meant the loss of all the world holds valuable….We lose our churches, but the Church remains secure. It is better to sacrifice property than freedom.”

By his firmness in an impossible situation, His Holiness not only saved the Faith in France, but revivified it through the immense admiration on the part of the French people for his courage and patience. He thereby roundly defeated the conspirators in their primary objective. Clemenceau, a Mason, as much as conceded this moral defeat when he said, “No one foresaw what resistance the Pope would show to the new law.”

The great Pontiff’s example in the French crisis served notice to the enemies of the Faith the world over. And in 1909, symbolically at the time of the beatification of Saint Joan of Arc, he verbally reiterated this warning, specifically addressing himself:

“to politicians who detect an enemy in the Church and therefore perpetually oppose her, to members of secret societies who with all the hatred inspired by Satan increasingly calumniate, vilify and attack her, to the false champions of Science who by sophistry of every kind strive to render her objectionable, as if she were a foe to liberty, civilization and intellectual progress….”

“Divine Mercy In My Soul,”

Diary of Saint Maria Faustina Kowalska.

Sister Faustina heard these words as she prayed for Poland; “I bear a special love for Poland, and if she will be obedient to My will, I will exalt her in might and holiness. From her will come forth the spark that will prepare the world for My final coming.” — Notebook VI 1732

Karol Wojtyla (John Paul) was born in Wadowice, Poland, where later he moved to Krakow begining his journey in the priesthood. Five years after his birth, Helena Kowalska from Glogowiec, Poland applied for the second time to the “Congregation of The Sister’s of Our Lady of Charity” on August 1, 1925. This time she was accepted. She was nearly 20 at this time. After completing her postulancy she received her veil, and on April 30, 1926 she received her habit and her name in religion. From now on Helena would bear the name of, Sister Mary Faustina.

“He who has the goods of this world and sees his brother in need and closes his heart to him, how does the love of God abide in him?” Everyone knows that the Fathers of the Church laid down the duty of the rich toward the poor in no uncertain terms. As St. Ambrose put it: “You are not making a gift of what is yours to the poor man, but you are giving him back what is his. You have been appropriating things that are meant to be for the common use of everyone. The earth belongs to everyone, not to the rich.” These words indicate that the right to private property is not absolute and unconditional.

No one may appropriate surplus goods solely for his own private use when others lack the bare necessities of life. In short,

“as the Fathers of the Church and other eminent theologians tell us, the right of private property may never be exercised to the detriment of the common good.”

POPE JOHN PAUL II CITED THE OFFICIAL ROMAN CATHOLIC STANCE ON DEFENSE WEAPONS!

The John Paul II cited the Catechism of the Catholic Church # 2265 that ‘…legitimate defense can be not only a right but a grave duty for someone responsible for another’s life, the common good of the family or of the state.’ Pope John Paul stated, ‘Unfortunately, it happens that the need to render the aggressor incapable of causing harm sometimes involves taking his life.’” — Pope John Paul II

Wojtyła was made a cardinal in June 1967. As cardinal archbishop of Kraków, he worked closely with Poland’s powerful primate cardinal, Stefan Wyszyński, archbishop of Warsaw, who declared that Christianity, not communism, was the true protector of the poor and oppressed.

An infinitely greater danger than the open persecutions against the Church — and not unrelated in their origin — were the attacks on the Faith from within.

Pope Pius spoke of both in his encyclical Communion rerum, in which he told how his heart bled continually because of the assaults on the Church, waged in an “internecine and domestic war, all the more perilous because it was unknown to most. Carried on by unnatural sons who hide in the bosom of the Church to wound her in silence, this war strikes more directly at the very roots, at the soul of the Church; its purpose is to muddy the springs of piety and Christian living, to poison the founts of doctrine, to corrupt the Deposit of Faith, to overturn the foundations of divine constitution, to mock all authority, whether of the Roman Pontiff or of the bishops, to give a new form to the Church, new laws, new tendencies, according to the pretensions of certain monstrous systems of thought, in short, to deform the beauty of the Spouse of Christ by forcing upon her the empty glitter of a new culture, a pseudo-science.”

Pope John Paul II when addressing ‘evolution’ cautioned the scientific community that science must be validated and they are not to bring it into the philosophical arena, by doing so, they are guilty of not science but mete-science.

The perfidious war against the Faith by subversion was waged under the banner of Modernism, described by the Pope as “the seed-plot of errors and perdition” which “broods like a poison in the bowels of modern society, alienated from God and from His Church.”

What is Modernism? It is a dogmatic medium for the “humanitarian tendency of contemporary society — the ambition to eliminate God from all social life,” says one writer. It “is denial of God and His Christ in their living reality, to be replaced by replicas which it can adore without needing to leave the self or submit to any other person,” says another. More specifically, it “is an organized and methodic skepticism of thought in the matter of Scripture, Theology and Church History,” as our own Sister Catherine summarized it.

2005-2013

“TO FIGHT AGAINST PAPACY IS A SOCIAL NECESSITY AND CONSTITUTES THE CONSTANT DUTY OF FREEMASONRY.”

One of the deepest forms of poverty a person can experience is isolation. If we look closely at other kinds of poverty, including material forms, we see that they are born from isolation, from not being loved or from difficulties in being able to love.

Poverty is often produced by a rejection of God’s love, by man’s basic and tragic tendency to close in on himself, thinking himself to be self-sufficient or merely an insignificant and ephemeral fact, a “stranger” in a random universe. Man is alienated when he is alone, when he is detached from reality, when he stops thinking and believing in a foundation[125].

All of humanity is alienated when too much trust is placed in merely human projects, ideologies and false utopias[126]. Today humanity appears much more interactive than in the past: this shared sense of being close to one another must be transformed into true communion. The development of peoples depends, above all, on a recognition that the human race is a single family working together in true communion, not simply a group of subjects who happen to live side by side[127].

Newspapers, blogs, talk-shows on radio and television are full of discussion over Pope Benedict XVI’s supposed call for a “new world order” or a “one-world government.” These ideas are, however, neither based in reality nor a clear reading of the Pope’s latest encyclical, Caritas in Veritate, the release of which spawned heated discussion.

The Pope actually speaks directly against a one-world government,and, as would be expected from those who have read his previous writings,calls for massive reform of the United Nations.

Confusion seems to have come from paragraph 67 of the encyclical, which has some choice pull-quotes which have spiced the pages of the world’s news, from the New York Times to those of conspiracy theorist bloggers seeing the Pope as the Anti-Christ.

The key quote which has led to the charge reads: “To manage the global economy; to revive economies hit by the crisis; to avoid any deterioration of the present crisis and the greater imbalances that would result; to bring about integral and timely disarmament, food security and peace; to guarantee the protection of the environment and to regulate migration: for all this, there is urgent need of a true world political authority, as my predecessor Blessed John XXIII indicated some years ago.”

However, in paragraph 41, the Holy Father specifically differentiates his concept of a world political authority from that of a one-world government. “We must,” he says “promote a dispersed political authority.” He explains that “The integrated economy of the present day does not make the role of States redundant, but rather it commits governments to greater collaboration with one another.

Both wisdom and prudence suggest not being too precipitous in declaring the demise of the State. In terms of the resolution of the current crisis, the State’s role seems destined to grow, as it regains many of its competences.

In some nations, moreover, the construction or reconstruction of the State remains a key factor in their development.”

Later in the encyclical (57) he speaks of the opposite concept to one- world government –subsidiarity (the principle of Catholic social teaching which states that matters ought to be handled by the smallest, lowest or least centralized competent authority) – as being essential.

“In order not to produce a dangerous universal power of a tyrannical nature, the governance of globalization must be marked by subsidiarity,”

Giordani explains Modernism as an ostensible “desire to modernize the Church, as if it had become senile, adapting Catholicism to the needs — intellectual, moral, and social — of the new times; or as declared in the Program of the Modernists (answering the encyclical Pascendi), it was the desire to live in union with Christians and Catholics who had adopted the spirit of the epoch: a desire to emancipate the faithful from ecclesiastical authority, science form dogma, the State from the Church, the heart from the head….” And he says the inevitable result would be to make of Catholicism “a sort of Protestantism: a mere noisy religious opinion, to be modified from generation to generation, to be changed from person to person, resolving itself at length into a system of natural ethics.”

To be still more specific, Modernism was inspired by the “free-thought” philosophy of Jean Jacques Rousseau, who actually coined its very name. It was institutionalized by the Subjectivism of Immanuel Kant.

But it was germinated and nurtured like a deadly fungus on the body of the Church by the same “enlightened” disciples of Lucifer who long have contrived to “infiltrate that place” and to “bore from within until nothing remains but an empty shell.”

The subtlety of Modernism is that under the presumptuous guise of bringing “Reason” to the Faith, it provided the means by which to compromise that infallible Faith with condemned heresies — to “reconcile truth with falsehood,” as Saint Pius X observed. Hence he described it not as a mere heresy itself, but as “the synthesis and poison of all heresies which tend to undermine the fundamentals of the Faith and to annihilate Christianity.”

SUBSIDIARITY

The principle of subsidiarity is opposed to all forms of collectivism. It sets limits for state intervention. It aims at harmonizing the relationships between individuals and societies. It tends toward the establishment of true international order.

Excessive intervention by the state can threaten personal freedom and initiative. The teaching of the Church has elaborated the principle of subsidiarity, according to which “a community of a higher order should not interfere in the internal life of a community of a lower order, depriving the latter of its functions, but rather should support it in case of need and help to co-ordinate its activity with the activities of the rest of society, always with a view to the common good.”

The responsibility of the state. “Economic activity, especially the activity of a market economy, cannot be conducted in an institutional, juridical, or political vacuum. On the contrary, it presupposes sure guarantees of individual freedom and private property, as well as a stable currency and efficient public services.

Hence the principal task of the state is to guarantee this security, so that those who work and produce can enjoy the fruits of their labors and thus feel encouraged to work efficiently and honestly. Another task of the state is that of overseeing and directing the exercise of human rights in the economic sector. However, primary responsibility in this area belongs not to the state but to individuals and to the various groups and associations which make up society.”

Despite repeated stern warnings from the holy Bishop of Rome, the heretical poison continued to spread, particularly amongst the clergy. And so he issued the decree Lamentibili on July 3, 1907, condemning sixty-five erroneous propositions taken from the writings of the arch-Modernist, Alfred Loisy. One learned scholar writes:

“It arrived as a thunderbolt. That…. August the Modernists had the audacity to gather at Molveno in the Trentino to organize their resistance… They protested their innocence to the Pope in an open letter entitled ‘That which we wish.’ But in secret they decided to cloak their revolt by remaining within the Church, to help her evolve according to their plans.”

Pius, however, well knew the treachery of his enemies and was not to be fooled.

In September of that same year, he intervened even more solemnly by issuing his famous,

Encyclical PASCENDI DOMINICI GREGIS

A lengthy and masterly exposition of the heretics, their false principles, and their evil purposes: “…Through pride the Modernists have overestimated themselves. They are puffed up with the vainglory which allows them to regard themselves as the sole possessors of knowledge, and, elated with presumption, makes them say,

‘We are not as the rest of men,’

and which leads them, lest they should seem as other men, to embrace and to devise novelties even of the most absurd kind. It is pride which …causes them to demand a compromise between authority and liberty. It is owing to their pride that they seek to be reformers of others while they forget to reform themselves.

“….These very men who pose as Doctors of the Church, who speak so highly of modern philosophy and show such contempt for Scholasticism, have embraced the one with its false glamour, precisely because their ignorance of the other has left them without the means of recognizing the confusion of their ideas and of refuting sophistry. Their system, replete with so many errors, has been born of the union between Faith and false philosophy.”

A storm of criticism and insult rained down on Christ’s holy Vicar after this final and inescapable condemnation of the heresy. Typical was this insolence from George Tyrell, a former Jesuit:

“The Modernist movement had quickened a thousand dim dreams of reunion [with what? or whom?] into its enthusiastic hope, when lo! Pius X comes forward with a stone in one hand and a scorpion in the other.”

Exemplifying the pompous arrogance for which they had been cited, other Modernists attempted to belittle the solemn condemnation by calling the Sovereign Pontiff, in his own humble words, a “country curate,” by which they meant to imply that he was no intellectual like themselves.

The truth, of course, is that for all his humility Saint Pius X was a brilliant theologian and philosopher, as Pascendi ably demonstrated. In fact, their having to stoop to base insults — many far worse than these — proves in itself that the Modernists were without any defense against this intellectual giant.

Pascendi is a literary monument to the splendid holiness, to the luminous wisdom, to the alert perspicacity, to the unflinching courage, to the uncompromising firmness and yet also the paternal gentleness — in short, to all the magnificent attributes of this contemporary Pope and Saint, whose disarmingly modest stature cast an awesome shadow on a worldwide battlefield.

Brazen and determined enemies of the divinely founded Church, both within and without, who were emboldened by the very powers of hell, had unexpectedly met far more than a match for their sinister craftiness in the person of one soft-spoken little man, Giuseppe Sarto. Those within the Church were forced to retreat back into dark shadows, and the ugly contagion of their Modernism was arrested — at least for a time.

Reforming the Priesthood

But Pius knew that neither the devil nor his disciples ever rest — much less do they ever give up. With characteristic action, therefore, he moved positively against the lingering “atmosphere of poison,” focusing on the infected clergy. Recalcitrant Modernist priests were excommunicated, and the warning of like justice was directly conveyed to all — regardless of ecclesiastical rank — who entertained notions of defying the Holy Office in its condemnation.

All priests were required to take an oath against Modernism. Moreover, the Pope issued his encyclical Pieni l’amina, in which he commanded the bishops to ordain only those whose discipline, obedience, and mental docility were completely assured. “You will have just the kind of priests you have educated,” he reminded them, and he ordered them to be particularly attentive to the seminaries:

“Let bishops furthermore exercise the most scrupulous vigilance over professors and curricula, recalling to their duty any who might be inclined to follow dangerous novelty, and removing from teaching posts any who do not profit by admonitions given them…. Discipline in seminaries must be constant and vigilant….”

All his sacerdotal life, Giuseppe Sarto had regarded unholy priests as a menace and a main reason why so many evils were able to flourish in the world — even more so in recent times because of the many abuses of the sacred ministry. And so as Pope in 1908 he wrote his famed Exhortation to the Catholic Clergy, a spiritual formula urging those ancient prescriptions of the Church — prayer, meditation, the study of holy works, and other practices conducive to an interior life — as the means by which to acquire priestly sanctity.

“The priest is not a man who can be good or bad just for himself alone; it is impossible to realize what an influence his manner and habit of living have on the faithful. A genuinely good priest is a treasure beyond compare!”

It is “interior holiness” that makes for a good priest: “If this holiness — the supereminent wisdom of Jesus Christ — is lacking in a priest, everything is lacking in him. Because — without holiness — a vast store of the finest learning (which We Ourselves are trying so hard to cultivate in priests), keenness and efficiency in management, while they may occasionally be of some service to the Church or to individual souls, are much more frequently the deplorable cause of harm to the Church and to souls.

How much a priest, even the lowliest, can do if he be holy, how many salutary works he can conceive and accomplish for the benefit of the faithful, all this is evident from the experience of every age of the Church. Suffice it to recall the comparatively recent Curé d’Ars, John the Baptist Vianney, whom We Ourselves are happy to have declared Blessed.”

(It was most fitting that His Holiness should have cited as an example for priests the Curé d’Ars, who is now canonized and is the Patron Saint of the priesthood. But it was all the more fitting that Saint John Vianney, the country curate to whom this Pontiff had a great devotion, should have been beatified by Saint Pius X, another model priest who called himself a “simple country curate.”)

“In this connection the point of first importance is to spend a part of our time every day in meditation on things eternal. No priest can omit this meditation without being notably careless, without causing detriment to his soul.”

Consider the example of priests who are lax about meditation: “In them you see men in whom the sensus Christi, the inestimable treasure, has become dimmed; men entirely attracted to worldly things, followers of mere vanities, giving themselves over to frivolities; priests who treat sacred things remissly, coldly, perhaps even unworthily… Among these priests, however, who are loathe, or who neglect entirely to consider their heart, there are some who do not try to hide the poverty of their souls, but they excuse themselves with the pretext that they have given themselves over entirely to the duties of their ministry and are spending themselves for the good of others.

As a matter of fact they are miserably mistaken. Unaccustomed as they are to speaking to God, when they talk of Him to men or try to teach men the counsels of a Christian life, they are utterly lacking in divine inspiration, so that in their mouth the word of God seems to be something that is almost dead.

Their voice, no matter how renowned for prudence and eloquence, is not at all like the voice of the Good Shepherd, to which the sheep well hearken; it is but an empty vainglorious noise, at times productive of dangerous example, and not without detriment to religion and scandal to the faithful.”

The Broken Heart of a Saint

Pope Pius achieved magnificent reforms among the priesthood. In fact, he brought numerous practical reforms to many aspects of Church life: ecclesiastical music and art, Canon Law, the Breviary, the Roman Curia, the study of Sacred Scripture, among so much more. And certainly his most notable reform was in restoring to the faithful in a great measure the spirit of Christian piety which had been rapidly shrinking.

It would be very difficult to account for all the splendid works of this loving Pastor of Christendom who labored and prayed tirelessly “to restore all things in Christ.” Nor would such an account, for that matter, really help us to know the true greatness of so saintly a Servant of the Servants of God.

For that appreciation comes from knowing the man not as the Pope, but rather as a tremendously holy and fervent priest who merely obediently accepted that supreme duty. As his Secretary of State and closest friend, Cardinal Merry del Val, wrote, “He gave me the impression that in his private life, it required a definite act on his part and an almost positive effort to realize that he was the Supreme Pontiff, endowed with all the prerogatives of that great office.”

Heroic sanctity is a requisite for canonization. Giuseppe Sarto, like all other saints, did not consciously seek to be heroic. He merely wanted to be holy, and God rewarded him by providing the occasion for his heroism as Pope Pius X.

We see the beautifully glowing sanctity of Saint Pius in his simplicity, his humility, and his complete dedication to God and His Church. But the key to all these shining virtues lies in his spirit of poverty and his loving charity — two qualities in Pius that were inseparable.

Detachment from worldly desires and comforts constitutes a proper spirit of poverty. And, indeed, Giuseppe Sarto practiced not merely the spirit, but the poverty itself. It is said that he was poorer as the Head of the Church than he had been as a pastor at Salzano. As Bishop of Rome he could no longer travel about a village, a city, or a diocese dispensing alms, as he routinely had always done in lower ecclesiastical offices. So instead he received the poor in vast numbers at the Vatican.

Moreover, those in need throughout the whole world benefited from his immense and unceasing generosity. He was impoverished at the time of his death, but he managed to provide a sizable endowment for the homeless children who had survived a terrible earthquake in 1908. And at the time of that disaster, it was Pius who rushed with large sums of his own money to bring relief to the stricken area.

But perhaps his being poor in spirit was the greater attribute than his material poverty. Was it not a supreme sacrifice for him to accept the Pontificate which he beheld as an unbearable cross? To leave the Venice he loved so much, never to see it again? To spend the rest of his eleven years of life as “a prisoner” inside the Vatican walls, enduring the unimaginable trials and sufferings of his lonely office? Some tell of finding the melancholy Pope on occasion sadly staring at a postcard picture of a railroad station in Rome — the escape route, as it were, back to the world. Others mention his ready alertness to the sound of a distant train whistle: “Do you hear it? That is the train for Venice!”

Just as much a part of that spirit, however, was his practice of shunning as much as possible all pomp and ceremony customarily due his noble office. Typically, on the fiftieth anniversary of his ordination, tells Father McAuliffe, Pope Pius celebrated “his jubilee Mass not as Pope, but as a simple priest. Clad in snow-white vestments, without pontifical regalia, he walked to the altar simply, humbly and devoutly, just as he had done fifty years previously in the little village church of Riese; the only difference now being that he was surrounded by four hundred bishops and over fifty thousand people.”

And we can be sure that it was by this same spirit that he ever remained aloof from adulation and praise — the certain pitfalls of pride. Thus he was able to maintain his conscience and clearmindedness to make decisions and to act justly in critical matters, free of the flattering persuasions of those who had vested interests.

2013-

“TO FIGHT AGAINST PAPACY IS A SOCIAL NECESSITY AND CONSTITUTES THE CONSTANT DUTY OF FREEMASONRY.”

And I say to you, that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatever you shall bind on earth shall be bound, even in heaven. And whatever you shall loose on earth shall be loosed, even in heaven. Matthew 16: 18-19

His father Mario was an accountant employed by the railways and his mother Regina Sivori was a committed wife dedicated to raising their five children.

He graduated as a chemical technician and then chose the path of the priesthood, entering the Diocesan Seminary of Villa Devoto. On 11 March 1958 he entered the novitiate of the Society of Jesus.

“Peace in the whole world, still divided by greed looking for easy gain, wounded by the selfishness which threatens human life and the family, selfishness that continues in human trafficking, the most extensive form of slavery in this twenty-first century; human trafficking is the most extensive form of slavery in this twenty-first century! Peace to the whole world, torn apart by violence linked to drug trafficking and by the iniquitous exploitation of natural resources! Peace to this our Earth! Made the risen Jesus bring comfort to the victims of natural disasters and make us responsible guardians of creation.

Dear brothers and sisters, to all of you who are listening to me, from Rome and from all over of the world, I address the invitation of the Psalm:

“Give thanks to the Lord for he is good; for his steadfast love endures for ever. Let Israel say: ‘His steadfast love endures for ever’” (Ps 117:1-2).”

“The unjust distribution of goods persists, creating a situation of social sin that cries out to heaven and limits the possibilities of a fuller life for so many of our brothers.”

–Pope Francis I

“Please, do not be stealing hope.” An appeal clear, though full of unspoken references to the historical moment we are living. So Papa Francesco, in the homily of Palm Sunday, addressed a packed St. Peter’s Square from 250 thousand faithful to listen. “At this moment – said the Pope – is the devil disguised as an angel and often insidiously tells us his word. Do not listen to him, we follow Jesus. ”

“God does not look powerful means: it is the cross that has overcome evil.” Still, “God does not choose the strongest, the bravest, He chooses the last one, the one that no one has considered. What matters is not the earthly power. ”

–Pope Francis I

In 2010, he opposed legislation in Argentina designed to promote homosexual marriages. In addition, he spoke out against the adoption of children by gays and lesbians, saying such adoptions would deprive children “of the human growth that God wanted them given by a father and a mother.”

He wrote in a letter to monasteries in Buenos Aires:

“Let’s not be naive — we’re not talking about a simple political battle; it is a destructive pretension against the plan of God. We are not talking about a mere bill, but rather a machination of the Father of Lies that seeks to confuse and deceive the children of God.”

–Pope Francis I

On the matter of homosexual civil unions, the Church’s teaching is laid out in a 2003 document approved and ordered published by Pope John Paul II and written by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, who was is currently Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI.

There are absolutely no grounds for considering homosexual unions to be in any way similar or even remotely analogous to God’s plan for marriage and family. Marriage is holy, while homosexual acts go against the natural moral law. Homosexual acts “close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved”.

In those situations where homosexual unions have been legally recognized or have been given the legal status and rights belonging to marriage, clear and emphatic opposition is a duty. One must refrain from any kind of formal cooperation in the enactment or application of such gravely unjust laws and, as far as possible, from material cooperation on the level of their application. In this area, everyone can exercise the right to conscientious objection.

The Church teaches that respect for homosexual persons cannot lead in any way to approval of homosexual behaviour or to legal recognition of homosexual unions

Meanwhile, additional information has come out strongly refuting contentions that Francis in some way supported the concept of giving recognition to homosexual unions.

Catholic News Agency reports today its Argentina director, Miquel Woites, told the agency that claims by Sergio Rubin that then Cardinal Bergoglio “proposed that the bishops [of Argentina] adopt a moderate position and perhaps leave room for civil unions as a compromise” are in fact “not true, they are totally inaccurate.” CNA adds Woites emphasized “It’s wrong to invent something like this out of thin air.”